Hypothetical fun

[zedrein]

OK kiddies, I have a hypothetical question:

Let's say I have 2 NTSC SNES system's (which I do) I am going to hook each of them up to different monitors.

The first I will hook up to a nice RGB monitor (like the Commodore 1084)

The second I will hook up to a VGA monitor (YES I KNOW THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE FREQUENCY ISSUE...THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION)

Now with the knowledge we have about both formats, what will be the differences in each picture?

Will the RGB look better? Will the VGA look better? Will they look exactly the same?

The ENTIRE purpose of this post if for me to determine if I want to go through the trouble of modding my SNES to display RGB, or just use my Nintendo Wii's "Virtual Console" service to play my games on a VGA monitor (because the Wii is capable of displaying VGA @ 480p)

If the VGA monitor looks just as good or better than a RGB...I will simply stick with the Wii. But if God's gift RGB looks better, then I'll simply get back to modding my SNES.

G'Day

[NFG]

It's a completely useless question.  There are so many variables to go along with the pure impossibility of it all that there is no simple answer.

How are you connecting it to the VGA monitor?  Upscan convertor?  Emulation?  Will there be scanlines, or will it be pixel-doubled?  Scaling or no scaling?

A VGA monitor is an RGB monitor with a higher sync rate, unless it's an LCD panel in which case it's nothing like a CRT.  The quality of the monitors also plays a part. 

As a general rule, original hardware with unmolested signals will look better than anything emulated or altered.  For most purposes you can assume RGB on a good monitor will look better than the same image on a VGA monitor or emulated, but in many cases the difference is so slight that people will not notice.

[viletim]

zedrein,

The difference between what is commonly know as RGB (video at 15.7Khz horiz freq) and VGA (video with > 31Khz horiz frequency) is only the ammount of video information you can fit on the screen.

The ammount of video info (resolution, number of pixels, etc) in a SNES game is fixed. The whole video system is designed around the limitations of a TV set.

Now, to display the amount video info from a SNES (or SNES emulator) on a higher resolution display it first has to be modified. Techniques to do this include line doubling, scaling, bluring, etc. However it's done, it's a pretty sure bet that it'll look different... Better or worse is subjective, but to me, it always looks worse when the image is modified than if it's displayed as originally intended.

For a rough comparison, plug in a real SNES into a TV by normal composite video and run the same game on the Wii/VGA monitor nearby. Try to imagine what the TV would look like without the composite video edge distortion and with the same colour intensity as the VGA monitor.

[zedrein]

^^^

Thanks gentlemen. In case you haven't noticed I am getting frustrated by this whole process.

I've shopped around my town and can't find a single RGB monitor for sale (I've been to multiple electronics dealers, second hand shops, and computer dealers)

I am by definition a audio/video-phile, so I look and listen very critically. There's is just something about playing SNES games they way the author intended them to look.

Sorry if these posts are getting repetitive, I just am one of those people who has to have everything figured out before I set out to do it.

I still need to purchase a SCART cable, capacitors, DB9 plug(s), and a RGB monitor to even begin modding my SNES, so if anyone has info on where I can get the best deals for this stuff, then please let me know.

[ken_cinder]

The Wii's VC is also an emulator, and by it's very nature (No matter how optimized) is not 100% accurate to the original hardware and never will be.

That aside, if you're a fiend for an accurate representation of a classic system.......use that system, on the Commodore monitor.
I prefer my old games scaled and filtered, without the poorly faked scanlines (They look NOTHING like they do on a real TV, they look horrid) on a good emulator. I just don't have the space for all of it anymore, and the real thing looks terrible on a 32" LCD, even with a good scaler inside the TV.

I find the nostalgia in the game itself, and a nice scaled and Super Eagle/Super 2xSai filtered image just makes it all the more nostalgic for me. I look at those old games in an unfiltered state and it ruins my memories of these games looking so awesome at the time.

[acem77]

I upscan all my legacy systems to vga using my xrgb2 plus.
I am very happy with the image and no scan lines.

Back in the day I had my face glued to every issue of GameFan.
They always had great pixel perfect rgb screen shots for most game.
I always wanted my game to look that clean.
Too young, dumb and poor then, now I have all of my old systems looking that great.
In the end playing games now in my set up reminds of the good old days when I drooled over the pics in GameFan

[RGB32E]

As a general rule, original hardware with unmolested signals will look better than anything emulated or altered.  For most purposes you can assume RGB on a good monitor will look better than the same image on a VGA monitor or emulated, but in many cases the difference is so slight that people will not notice.

The exception being arcade or console emulation on a PC connected via VGA(or above), DVI, or HDMI to an appropriate HDTV, or computer monitor.  Even if the emulation isn't 100% (how would you quantify 98%? ), the output from a non-crap video card solution will deliver a vastly better signal than an original console ever could on an appropriate computer monitor or HDTV. 

[NFG]

the output from a non-crap video card solution will deliver a vastly better signal than an original console ever could on an appropriate computer monitor or HDTV.

If you're suggesting a modern TV's capabilities would best be matched by a video source capable of producing a compatible signal, you're probably right.

If you're suggesting a modern display and modern video source will always produce a better image than the original hardware and compatible monitor, I'd have to disagree.  While it may sometimes be true, it's certainly not always true.

[RGB32E]

the output from a non-crap video card solution will deliver a vastly better signal than an original console ever could on an appropriate computer monitor or HDTV.

If you're suggesting a modern TV's capabilities would best be matched by a video source capable of producing a compatible signal, you're probably right.

If you're suggesting a modern display and modern video source will always produce a better image than the original hardware and compatible monitor, I'd have to disagree.  While it may sometimes be true, it's certainly not always true.

I stated what I stated... an exception.  So for any platform that can't output VGA or above (via analog or digital), a PC can be an exception for providing a better quality "signal" for high resolution displays.

Aside from that, is a NTSC Wii connected to a TV via component playing a VC game running in double strike (e.g. F-Zero) going to look better or worse than a SNES connected to the same TV using an RGB to component converter?  Speculation anyone? 

[ken_cinder]

I'd have to say the above would be a matter of opinion and preference.